It is generally known that any non-driving-related task performed by a driver can be a distraction from driving. Because of this, there has been a recent focus on reducing the use of mobile telephones while driving, both by legislative means and by driver education. There has also been an increasing demand for driver access to information, communication, and entertainment functions in the vehicle.
Studies have shown that speech-based interfaces can be less distracting than conventional visual or manual interfaces. Command-based speech interfaces for limited functions are becoming common in vehicles. However, text entry using speech for such functions as SMS is difficult because recognition of a large-vocabulary continuous speech is prone to errors. Thus, there is a need for correcting or otherwise changing text that has been input using speech while reducing distraction on the part of a user while driving.
Some methods for correcting unrestricted speech utilize editing applications, i.e., word processors with computer displays and conventional keyboards. For example, the method, described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,960,447, corrects misrecognitions of speech by tagging words in the recognized text with associated speech and allowing users of word processing software to listen to the speech for editing text transcriptions.
Another method, described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,970,460 improves editing operations by associating a “speech event database” with positions in a text transcription in an editing application program and widening the context. Such methods require primary attention to the correction task including conventional keyboard, mice, and menu selection and, particularly, drawing upon visual resources necessary to attend to visual displays. However, the use of keyboards, touchscreen, and large visual displays do not minimize distractions from driving.
Other methods minimize complexity of interaction by using subsequent speech to edit the transcription resulting from a first speech. For example, a method described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,064,959 corrects result of the speech recognition using the subsequent utterance. Similarly, the method described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,444,286 selects portions of the speech recognition to be re-recognized. However, the subsequent interpretation of the speech can produce errors, resulting in increased the error correction efforts, and further contributing to driver distraction.
Another method described in U.S. 2006/293,889 uses corrections of a single word given by the user to adjust the alternative suggestions for words adjacent to that single word. However, if multiple words in the speech of the user are interpreted incorrectly, the user has to correct the speech interpretation multiple times. Moreover, the corrections of this method are limited to replacement of the selected word, as opposed to more general types of interactions, which may lead to further distractions for the user. Therefore there is a need to minimize the interactions and user attention necessary to guide the interpretation of speech.